Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCOtherNot stated in the judgment text· [2016] KEELRC 775 (KLR)

Rift Valley Railways Workers Union (K) v Kenya Railways Staff Retirement Benefits Scheme & 6 others [2016] KEELRC 775 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
19 August 2016
1,053 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~4 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Pension disputes must first go through the Retirement Benefits Act's internal review and appeal processes before any Kenyan court will hear them.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The Claimant filed a claim on 23rd December 2015 seeking the appointment of a caretaker committee to manage pensioners' assets then under the management of the 1st Respondent, and a forensic audit to be conducted by the 1st and 2nd Interested Parties. Alongside the claim was a Notice of Motion seeking similar orders plus empanelling of a three-Judge Bench. The 1st and 2nd Respondents raised preliminary objections on jurisdiction, res judicata/res sub judice, and frivolousness/abuse of process, while the 3rd Interested Party objected to its joinder. The Court directed parties to file submissions on the multiple preliminary objections. The Court applied the principle from Owners of MV Lillian 'S' v Caltex Oil Kenya Ltd that jurisdiction must be determined as soon as raised, and adopted the Supreme Court's holding in Samuel Kamau Macharia that a court's jurisdiction flows only from the Constitution or legislation. Reading Section 12 of the Employment and Labour Relations Court Act together with the Retirement Benefits Act, the Court held that although it is of equal status with the High Court and has supervisory jurisdiction over the Retirement Benefits Appeals Tribunal, parties must first exhaust the dispute resolution mechanisms established under the Retirement Benefits Act (review by the CEO under Section 46(1) and appeal to the Tribunal under Section 47). Following Tom Kusienya and Daniel Owuor Obop, the Court found the statutory mechanisms had not been exhausted and the claim was premature. The Court declined to exercise jurisdiction, referred the matter for resolution under the Retirement Benefits Act, made no findings on the other grounds in the preliminary objections, and ordered each party to bear their own costs.

Key legal issues

#
01

Jurisdiction of the ELRC over retirement benefits scheme disputes

Holding

The Court has supervisory jurisdiction over the Retirement Benefits Appeals Tribunal but parties must first exhaust statutory dispute resolution mechanisms under the Retirement Benefits Act before approaching the Court

Reasoning

Section 12 of the Employment and Labour Relations Court Act confers jurisdiction over employment and labour relations matters, but must be read together with other statutes. Section 46(1) provides review by the CEO of the Authority and Section 47 establishes the Appeals Tribunal. The Court held that although it has supervisory jurisdiction over such tribunals, this does not entitle a party to bypass the statutory dispute resolution mechanisms before exhausting them.

p. 3
02

Prematurity of the claim

Holding

The claim was prematurely before the Court as statutory remedies had not been exhausted, and the matter was referred back to the statutory mechanisms

Reasoning

Having found that the dispute resolution mechanisms under the Retirement Benefits Act had not been exhausted, the Court concluded the claim was premature and declined to exercise jurisdiction, referring the matter back rather than dismissing it on other grounds raised in the preliminary objections.

p. 4

Legal principles established

#
  • A party must exhaust the dispute resolution mechanisms provided under the Retirement Benefits Act before coming to court
  • The Court's jurisdiction flows from the Constitution or legislation, and cannot be self-arrogated

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The Court declined to exercise jurisdiction over the claim
  2. 2.The matter is referred for resolution under the dispute resolution mechanisms provided under the Retirement Benefits Act
  3. 3.Each party will bear their own costs

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Retirement Benefits ActSection 46(1)
  • Retirement Benefits ActSection 47
  • Employment and Labour Relations Court ActSection 12

Cases cited (5)

  • Owners of MV Lillian 'S' v Caltex Oil Kenya Ltd
    (1989) KLR 1
  • Samuel Kamau Macharia & another v Kenya Commercial Bank & 2 Others
    [2012] eKLR
  • Tom Kusienya & Others v Kenya Railways Staff Retirement Benefits Scheme
    Petition No 353 of 2012
  • Daniel Owuor Obop & 2 Others v Retirement Benefits Authority
    Petition No 159 of 2012
  • Azariah v CEO, Retirement Benefits Authority & 3 Others
    HCCJR No 214 of 2015
Jurisdiction invoked
Section 12 of the Employment and Labour Relations Court Act

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Rift Valley Railways Workers Union (K) v Kenya Railways Staff Retirement Benefits Scheme & 6 others [2016] KEELRC 775 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2016). Not stated in the judgment text. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2016/775/eng@2016-08-19

Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.